Tim J Knobbe1, Daan Kremer2, Femke I Abma3, Coby Annema4, Stefan P Berger2, Gerjan J Navis2, Sijrike F van der Mei5, Ute Bültmann3, Annemieke Visser5, Stephan J L Bakker. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands t.j.knobbe@umcg.nl. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Health Sciences, Community and Occupational Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Health Sciences, Section of Nursing Science, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Health Sciences, Applied Health Research, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To date, employment figures of kidney transplant recipients in Europe are inconsistent. Additionally, little is known about work functioning of employed kidney transplant recipients and work functioning trajectories before and after transplantation. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Data from the ongoing TransplantLines Biobank and Cohort study and from community-dwelling employed adults were used. Health-related work functioning of kidney transplant recipients was assessed with the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 and compared with potential kidney donors and community-dwelling employed adults. RESULTS: We included 668 kidney transplant recipients of working age (59% men, age 51±11 years) at median 3 (interquartile range, 2-10) years after transplantation, 246 potential kidney donors of working age (43% men, age 53±9 years), and 553 community-dwelling employed adults (70% men, age 45±11 years). The proportion of employed kidney transplant recipients was lower compared with potential kidney donors (56% versus 79%). If employed, the work functioning score of kidney transplant recipients was slightly lower compared with employed potential kidney donors yet higher compared with community-dwelling employed adults (medians 91 [interquartile range, 76-98], 94 [interquartile range, 85-99], and 88 [interquartile range, 79-95], respectively). Backward linear regression analyses revealed that lower educational level, having a kidney from a deceased donor, presence of tingling or numbness of hands or feet, presence of concentration/memory problems, presence of anxiety, and presence of severe fatigue were independently associated with lower work functioning among kidney transplant recipients. Additional subgroup analyses showed that work functioning scores were lower before transplantation than at 12 months after transplantation (83 [interquartile range, 66-93] versus 92 [interquartile range, 88-98], respectively; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Stable employed kidney transplant recipients report to function well at work. In addition, this study shows that self-reported work functioning is higher after successful kidney transplantation compared with before transplantation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER: TransplantLines Biobank and Cohort study, NCT03272841 PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2022_09_26_CJN05560522.mp3.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To date, employment figures of kidney transplant recipients in Europe are inconsistent. Additionally, little is known about work functioning of employed kidney transplant recipients and work functioning trajectories before and after transplantation. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Data from the ongoing TransplantLines Biobank and Cohort study and from community-dwelling employed adults were used. Health-related work functioning of kidney transplant recipients was assessed with the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 and compared with potential kidney donors and community-dwelling employed adults. RESULTS: We included 668 kidney transplant recipients of working age (59% men, age 51±11 years) at median 3 (interquartile range, 2-10) years after transplantation, 246 potential kidney donors of working age (43% men, age 53±9 years), and 553 community-dwelling employed adults (70% men, age 45±11 years). The proportion of employed kidney transplant recipients was lower compared with potential kidney donors (56% versus 79%). If employed, the work functioning score of kidney transplant recipients was slightly lower compared with employed potential kidney donors yet higher compared with community-dwelling employed adults (medians 91 [interquartile range, 76-98], 94 [interquartile range, 85-99], and 88 [interquartile range, 79-95], respectively). Backward linear regression analyses revealed that lower educational level, having a kidney from a deceased donor, presence of tingling or numbness of hands or feet, presence of concentration/memory problems, presence of anxiety, and presence of severe fatigue were independently associated with lower work functioning among kidney transplant recipients. Additional subgroup analyses showed that work functioning scores were lower before transplantation than at 12 months after transplantation (83 [interquartile range, 66-93] versus 92 [interquartile range, 88-98], respectively; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Stable employed kidney transplant recipients report to function well at work. In addition, this study shows that self-reported work functioning is higher after successful kidney transplantation compared with before transplantation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER: TransplantLines Biobank and Cohort study, NCT03272841 PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2022_09_26_CJN05560522.mp3.
Authors: Matthew Modini; Sadhbh Joyce; Arnstein Mykletun; Helen Christensen; Richard A Bryant; Philip B Mitchell; Samuel B Harvey Journal: Australas Psychiatry Date: 2016-01-15 Impact factor: 1.369
Authors: Sijrike F van der Mei; Eric L P van Sonderen; Willem J van Son; Paul E de Jong; Johan W Groothoff; Wim J A van den Heuvel Journal: Disabil Rehabil Date: 2007-03-30 Impact factor: 3.033
Authors: H F Dorland; F I Abma; C A M Roelen; A Smink; M Feuerstein; B C Amick; A V Ranchor; U Bültmann Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Michele F Eisenga; Antonio W Gomes-Neto; Marco van Londen; Aaltje L Ziengs; Rianne M Douwes; Suzanne P Stam; Maryse C J Osté; Tim J Knobbe; Niek R Hessels; Anne M Buunk; Coby Annema; Marion J Siebelink; Emoke Racz; Jacoba M Spikman; Frank A J A Bodewes; Robert A Pol; Stefan P Berger; Gea Drost; Robert J Porte; Henri G D Leuvenink; Kevin Damman; Erik A M Verschuuren; Vincent E de Meijer; Hans Blokzijl; Stephan J L Bakker Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-12-31 Impact factor: 2.692